Active academic life

在香港唸PHD同在澳洲或者其他西方國家讀有什麼分別? 經過這一個月體驗之後我覺得最大分別是，跟supervisor和fellow students or colleagues之間的互動。在香港，在我跟prof Jim唸Mphil嘅日子，我差不多每日都在自己做自己的東西，有事就找老闆，無事就一個人找資料，雖然固定地跟老闆見面，但過程都是一對一，不會有其他students or colleagues一齊分享，更加不會有一些半formal的sharing OR meeting。但在這裡，我跟Clive, Anthony還有Ella每隔個禮拜都會有meeting，談談過去果兩個禮拜做了些什麼，有什麼得著有什麼問題，大家可以知道對方在想在做什麼之外，亦都可以給自己一個機會去present自己的ideas，好像今日我們就在OFFICE外小草地旁邊的cafe聊了一個小時，雖然我講的不多，但我也enjoy 而且appreciate有這樣機會，跟一些思想差不多的人交流。而我們大概每個月左右就會有一次比較causal 嘅socializing event – 去bar 食晚飯聊天，什麼都聊也會說一些學術的東西，目的是讓大家更close而且relax一下。香港就比較少這樣的機會了，別說跟老闆，就算同學間都不會很close (那些大陸學生就更不sociable)，師生之間的討論闊度有限，交流亦流於表面，比較被動，這對學生來說，無論是個人成長或者學術發展都有一定阻礙

Environmental behaviour

Read an insightful article wriiten by Paul Stern, a renowned environmental psychologist. It is about the what factors determine intended environmental behaviours. Here I summarize the key points.

First, there are four (or three) main types of environmental behaviours:
1. Environmental activism, e.g. active involvement in environmental organizations and demonstrations;

2. Public-sphere non-activism -
(a), Environmental citizenship, e.g. petitioning on environmental issues, joining environmental organizations;
(b), Policy support or acceptance, stated approval of environmental regulations, willingness to pay higher taxes for environmental protection

3. Private-sphere environmentalism, e.g. purchase of environmentally friendly products, green comsumerism.

Four types of causal variables influencing these behaviours are proposed:
1. Attitudinal, e.g. general and specific environmental beliefs, personal norms, perceived costs and benefits of the action

2. Personal capabilities, e.g. social status, income, specific skills

3. Contextual factors, e.g. laws and regulations, social norms and expectations, supporting policies

4. Habit and routine


The author notes that different causal variables appear to work different ways in influencing behaviours. For costly, complex and difficult environmental decisions (e.g. reducing automobile use in suburb), personal capabilities and contextual factors are more important. For those 'easy' behaviours (e.g. reducing the use of papers), attitudinal factors play major role.


Two points to note.
Firstly, the bases of private- and public-sphere environmental behaviours are different. To me, it means that my WTP (willingness-to-pay) for organic foods runs in a different mental track from paying an ecotax to support organic farming - one is about personal consumption while the other a social committment. (so, some people may say they support a government environmental policy but in fact do not personally behave green. This reflects there are different combinations of causal factors in action).
Secondly, contextual factors have to be considered (many previous studies have ignored). These involve broader social, economic and political contexts surrounding specific environmental issues. As far as climate change is concerned, personal attitudinal factors are but one of the determinants of people's intended contributions, which may also be affected by existing policy constraints and attitude, perceived reliability of scientific reports, and social trust.

Extended reading: Paul C. Stern (2000), Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior, Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), pp. 407-424

Free market and Nobel Prize

It's time to change.


「金融海嘯勢顛覆諾獎評選」 經濟災難元兇 矛頭直指佛利民
(明報)10月6日 星期一 05:05

【明報專訊】一年一度的諾貝爾獎 將於今天開始公布。當前金融海嘯了令全球經濟陷危，也令諾貝爾經濟學獎過去長期褒揚自由主義經濟學派的角色受質疑。不少評論都將金融海嘯歸咎於佛利民和「芝加哥學派」等鼓吹的美式自由主義經濟模式，2001年諾貝爾經濟學獎得主施蒂格利茨近日接受法新社訪問，便指出諾獎評審過去厚愛芝加哥學派，但今次金融海嘯將令諾貝爾經濟學獎的取向徹底改變。

在2001年贏得諾貝爾經濟學獎的哥倫比亞大學教授施蒂格利茨（Joseph Stiglitz）向法新社說﹕「我想當前的危機，正為經濟學帶來一場根本性的哲學理念轉變。我們看到不受管束的市場可以是一場災難。」

自1969年創立以來，諾貝爾經濟學獎曾頒給各個不同範疇從事研究的經濟學家，除宏觀及微觀經濟學外，還有部分得獎研究是涉及政治學以至心理學，但經濟學獎評審委員會一直都被批評太厚愛「新古典經濟學」。「新古典經濟學」鼓吹自由主義市場、主張放寬管制（deregulation），向獲華府建制推崇，成為當今主宰世界經濟的思想主流。

奪獎常客「芝加哥學派」恐失勢

但愈來愈多人指出，促成今時今日經濟災難的，正正是佛利民（Milton Friedman）這些鼓吹自由主義市場的經濟學獎得主的理論。佛利民於1976年獲得諾獎，他跟「芝加哥學派」（Chicago School）的經濟理念，掀起了一場右派經濟政策革命，不僅催生了列根和戴卓爾的經濟革命，連拉丁美洲、東歐和亞洲，都在不同階段或自願或被迫地了採納其主張。

批評者指出，這些自由派經濟學家堅信私人企業的決策最有效率、市場永遠是理性、政府不應插手干預及規管，這樣經濟就能以最佳狀態運作，但這些經濟學理論顯然要為今天的金融災難所負責。曾狠批世銀政策、導致2000年離任的世銀前首席經濟師施蒂格利茨說﹕「最近發生的連串事件，無疑提供了關鍵的實證，印證讓市場自行運作，情况並非那麼好。」

近半經濟學獎得主與芝大有關

在58位贏得諾貝爾獎的經濟學家中，有40位（即69%）是美國 人，當中來自芝加哥大學的「芝加哥學派」，得獎者特別多，至少有25位經濟學獎得主都跟芝大有關係。施氏說﹕「曾幾何時大家都流傳着這個笑話，就是說芝加哥和斯德哥爾摩之間有一列快車直達。」諾貝爾經濟學獎，是在瑞典 首都斯德哥爾摩頒發的。

隨着各國都為對抗金融海嘯而手忙腳亂，施氏和一些經濟學家都相信，未來經濟獎評審將不會再繼續將焦點放在放任自由主義上。經濟學家舍霍盧姆說﹕「這次的金融危機可令市場全面倒退……我不能相信這不會影響諾貝爾獎。」

學者料轉投混沌理論宏觀經濟學

瑞典SEB銀行首席分析師弗里森亦說﹕「現時仍有一些這範疇（新古典自由主義經濟學）的有趣研究，但無可避免地（人們會對這套學說）出現反彈……我認為這會令一些新研究範疇也有機會問鼎。」

弗里森指出，人們將對宏觀經濟學上穩定市場的部分重燃興趣，並更專注於混沌理論，以及像有關「信貸市場和社會經濟的互動關係」等的研究。施蒂格利茨亦說，他預期諾獎會走出以往的舊路，轉向生態經濟學等新領域。

法新社

Preliminary ideas about my PhD project

Some ideas about my PhD project, very preliminary.

'Trust, responsbility, and value: deliberation on global warming'

The sense of trust refers to trust in institutions, experts and the rest of the public, while responsbility is about how the costs and precautionary works are attributed, i.e. to the state, to private companies, or to NGOs?

Do these influence individiuals' environmental behaviours? especially in articulating a value for nature?

These all involve justice, both distributional and procedural justice.
Are these valid dimensions of environmental value?

And we can make use of focus group to further investigate how they interact and transform in a deliberation process.

So the ultimate questions are: does justice count? does 'economic' value exist?

Research design may include a paper survey and a focus group. If my supervisor can give me extra funding (it will take quite a lot time and $$), we can do a cultural comparative study, in China and Australia. If China is not feasible, Taiwan is a second choice.